All Hillary and her army of elite surrogates had to do was sit back

[cali]

All Hillary and her surrogates had to do was put out this disciplined message over and over:

"Bernie is a good man but he's unelectable. He is not prepared to sit in the oval office and make critical decisions, particularly on foreign affairs."

Seriously, that's all they had to do, and no one could say that they were diving into the gutter. Hillary wouldn't be adding to her unreliability. But they're going full Clinton on him with lying smears, alienating millions they need in the general. I just don't get it. It seems so counterintuitive.

It's not like Bernie has been making the progress he needs to in minority communities. It's not like he has scores of superdelegates.

So why try to destroy him?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. I keep thinking back to 2008

and the hit job the Clintons did on Obama - the racial dog whistles (this time the dog whistle is that Bernie is a bad Jew) and the insinuation that Obama (and now Sanders) couldn't handle foreign affairs. Remember the "3:00 a.m. phone call" ad? It's deja vu all over again. But it didn't work then and I sure as hell hope it won't work this time.

[virtualobserver]

2. I think that I have the answer

[cali]

5. Can you explain? Sorry to be dense here.

[virtualobserver]

8. Bernie has boxed Hillary in on Wall St. money, while money flows to him easily

She cannot survive a long slog without relying heavily on either Financial Services fundraisers (which Bernie will immediately call her out on each time) or superPAC money, which he will also call her out on.

Bernie has been outspending Hillary in NH, and now Nevada and South Carolina.

She is trying to go in for the kill because she can't compete in terms of money.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

17. actually, she has spent far more than Bernie.

Plus, she has had a large footprint in Iowa and NH for months. Bernie? not so long.

[virtualobserver]

20. but in NH, and now Nevada and SC......he was and is outspending her, especially in terms of TV ads

[ChairmanAgnostic]

21. That could very well be.

But she started with many times what he has gathered, and she has spent 85% of it. He had far less (but quite impressive given the difference in donation amounts) and has spent a smaller percentage, like 40% or so.

Let's not even consider super-pac moneys.

[virtualobserver]

22. Yeah, they blew enormous wads of cash on their .2% "landslide in IA.....

.....while patting themselves on the back on how "frugal" they were this time.

Their new "to be perfectly dishonest" campaign should convince more voters that Hillary cannot be trusted.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

25. I'm with you there.

I just saw that clip with Bernie and Steve Colbert. The crowd cheered when he sipped the beer. Because not only is Bernie a guy I'd love to have a beer with, but I'd love to toast him in the White House.

[nc4bo]

10. +1. nt

[djean111]

3. It is in their nature. They absolutely fucking love the gutter. They happily splash in the slime.

They cannot help it.

I am not playing their game any more, come what may.

[Kip Humphrey]

26. It is in their nature... The scorpian will alway sting...

[earthshine]

47. Ah... Voyager

Or as I always referred to it, Star Trek light.

[GoneFishin]

56. That quote has occurred to me several times in regard to some of the bad behavior we have seen, but

I had not yet found the ideal context to make reference to it. Yes, rational thought is not always a factor. Sometimes it just boils down to "it is in their nature".

[polly7]

4. Imo, because they are terrified of his hatred of the economic inequality

that is destroying so many lives now very public and resonating with millions. He's threatening their profits. They didn't expect him to gain such support and now have to try anything and everything, no matter how dishonest or slimy.

[cali]

7. That makes sense, Polly. Thanks. Destroy the messenger

to destroy the message.

[bkkyosemite]

31. cali those are so many hearts they brighten up my eyes and my day

[Docreed2003]

33. Exactly! Nt

[Paulie]

6. Because he's not a democrat and he doesn't deserve it

That's the argument. Even if he's correct on the positions affecting America. Party first, people second. Not confusing at all.

But Bernie is working hard and staying positive. He has a record and the smears may not work after all.

[Orsino]

9. That's the huge advantage of name recognition with the Establishment.

It would be very easy to elect Hillary Clinton, given the simian nature of any possible Republican opponent.

Sanders polls about as well versus the GOP slate, so I think the electability thing may no longer exist. Whoever we nominate, we're gonna win the White House.

[cali]

14. I don't agree. Republicans are far more motivated. And we

have strong evidence of that.

[Orsino]

18. Some of them certainly are.

Protofascists do work up a good lather, and Big Money will sing us their anthems.

However, polling is consistently showing any GOP candidate likely to lose to either potential Democratic nominee. Dunno if that's gonna change.

[jeff47]

37. Actually, they don't.

Polls show Sanders winning against everyone on the GOP side.

Polls show Clinton winning against some on the GOP side, tying others, and losing to Rubiobot.

[Orsino]

38. Heh. I rather doubt that...

...but if it was so, I suspect that will change.

I would be happy to believe that Sanders already polls as the better vote-getter, but I probably don't trust polls to split those sort of hairs--and of c ourselves the nomi n ation's quite a ways off, and November even more remote. I think that an actual Democratic nominee will poll better than either of our c a ndidates does now.

I'll think good thoughts.

[jeff47]

39. There hasn't been new polling since Rubiobot imploded

But he did beat her in polls taken after IA.

I would be happy to believe that Sanders already polls as the better vote-getter, but I probably don't trust polls to split those sort of hairs

How is "wins by a larger percentage" a difficult-to-split hair?

[Orsino]

41. Polls that are behind us...

...can't really predict November. As Rubio himself seems to be proving.

Polled-better-last-month isn't a reasonable source for predicting the outcome of an election nine months away, when the slates are different. I'll acknowledge the existence of polls without caring about a few percentage points.

[jeff47]

42. It isn't just a few points.

And one's "gut" is far less reliable about elections 9 months away.

[Orsino]

45. Yes.

These are tea leaves we're reading.

Get most of the clowns off the slate, add some running mates, give us a few debates, and we can begin to worry about percentage points.

[Betty Karlson]

32. Not really: Clinton is difficult to elect, as she alienates so many key demographics of the

Democratic Party. Her coattails would be net negative...

[Orsino]

34. Polls say otherwise...

...and though polls may be bullshit and November's a long way off, polls are about all the data we have.

[Betty Karlson]

60. Polls say 14 % of the democratic base would be pushed away from voting by her presence

at the top of the ticket. I call that writing on the wall.

[mmonk]

11. They are afraid of the people. Thus they have been

over-reacting (panic).

[bigtree]

12. this sounds completely unhinged

...you act as if there hasn't been an aggressive, strident campaign against Hillary. The 'liar, liar' strategy is cute, but not as innocent as you believe. It's inherently prevaricating, in and of itself.

The worst thing is the whining and the victim complex that infects every response from the Sanders defenders to dissent or disagreement from Hillary with their campaign.

What really stands out is, here's a guy who wants to be president of the United States... do you really think he's as devastated as you are by someone's words in a campaign? He doesn't appear to be.

[KingCharlemagne]

15. From all accounts, when she accused him of promulgating an "artful smear" for

Raising questions about quid pro quos with Wall Street, he wee visibly passed off. I did not watch that debate, so cannot proffer my own opinion.

[cali]

16. Not by Bernie.

You are the one that sounds out there, conflating attacks by people on message boards with official campaign tactics.

[artislife]

40. Funny how my first hide was for using the word unhinged

After being followed by swarm members for a back and forth of 7+ replies.

I guess it is a fine word now and not implying that someone doesn't respect people with mental incompacities.


Just an observation on the changes on the site.


Carry on.

[Live and Learn]

59. No, he is not devastated by it. But it is funny that you are calling Bernie's supporters out for

the same things you did when MOM was attacked on anything.

[Wilms]

13. If Clinton had suspended her campaign she would have gotten more votes.

Her clumsiness is nothing new.

[krawhitham]

19. Going forward Hillary has a simple choice to make

Try convincing people she is a better choice than Sanders

or

Try convincing people Sanders is no good and is worse than she is


Beating down Sanders is the easier route for the primary season but could very well doom a General Election and lead to president Trump.

[HereSince1628]

23. Like the Spanish Armada, the force was assembled for use

and it wouldn't be pragmatic to do anything else.

The philosophy it was built upon was "We are coming, We have seen, They WILL DIE!"

Unfortunately, Armadas are assembled to fight the battle you anticipate, not the battle you end up in. They bottled up all the dem's usual sources of campaign funds, got most of the superdelegates to sign on, and felt they were invincible and thereby inevitable.

It's proven to be a fleet full of questionable choices, whose correction is demanding shucking plans and shifting footing that leaves surrogates embarrassed by their own words.

It looks awkward at this point. But as much as people hate the meaninglessness of IA and NY, this is really what the first primary and caucus are about...testing the message. Clinton has recognized she clearly needs a change.

[Downwinder]

24. Just her nature.

[cali]

27. I think Polly is right: Destroy the messenger, destroy the message.

[Downwinder]

30. For the last few days I have been thinking about

The Scorpion and the Frog

http://www.allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html

[firebrand80]

28. Poor Bernie nt

[AgingAmerican]

50. Poor Hillary

Her lashing out and reacting are now blowing up in her face, which leads to more lashing out and reacting. It is a cycle that feeds on itself, and the more ground she loses the more desperate her actions become.

Apparently name recognition alone ain't all that after all...

[Zorra]

29. Recommend. nt

[magical thyme]

35. because they're terrified.

Panic induces lashing out and flailing.

[in_cog_ni_to]

36. We're witnessing her Kitchen Sink politics. The ultimate sleazy campaign.

Nothing she is throwing at him is going to matter to Independents, Millennials, WOMEN, True Progressivs, Boomers, etc...

In fact, it will more than likely drive more of those people to Bernie. Her sleazy campaign is so, so, so ...CLINTONIAN. It's not going to help her flailing campaign. It didn't help her in IOWA AND NEW HAMPSHIRE!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[cali]

44. Yes, and she'll sink lower.

[earthshine]

49. She drove me away in 2008 with her campaign tactics.

I never came back to liking her or Bill.

[Punkingal]

43. Because that is what they do. They always have.

[karynnj]

46. thar may be the only mode they know how to use

They had a tiered enemies list in 2008 and some like Colin Kennedy and Bill Richardson were attacked by them after she lost.

This seems to be even more HRC than Bill Clinton, but it's clear they see anyone not for them as enemies, not simply opponents.

[AgingAmerican]

48. Bernie Sanders threatens the corporate goose that lays the golden eggs

It's about personal enrichment for politicians. Pay to play. Cushy speaking tours for six figure fees.

It's about corruption and fuck the little guy. That's what they are scared of.

[HooptieWagon]

51. Clinton is driving the wedge so deep she won't win the GE.

At the rate she's going, what Sanders supporter is going to vote for her? She's not a uniter, she's a divider. And she's dividing her potential November coalition into increasingly smaller units. A few more months of this and she's got nowhere near the votes she needs.

[TTUBatfan2008]

54. This is my feeling too

In a year where the turnout has been stronger for the Republicans, I don't think identity politics is a good way to unite the party for November.

[HooptieWagon]

55. Blind Ambition.

The ends justify the means when it comes to achieving the legacy she feels entitled to. Unfortunately for her, in doing so she's alienating votes she's going to need in a GE. Maybe 20 years ago she could have made nice after the convention and United the party, but I don't see it happening now. A majority of voters, D and R, are fed up with corrupt establishment politicians. She's burning the bridges to them.

[H2O Man]

52. Recommended.

The level of hatred in the Clinton campaign concerns me. It's far too close to the rage being channeled by the republican candidates. Hillary Clinton needs to address this, much in the manner that John McCain did late in the 2008 campaign.

[Beacool]

53. What level of hatred????

Read the vile on this board against Hillary. When it comes to the Clintons, this place more often resembles a RW site than a Democratic one.

[MisterP]

57. I could've told 'em--play serene and superior, stay vague and friendly to everyone

[Live and Learn]

58. I have to disagree. Bernie has made inroads with minorities and proven he is electable. nt

[Kentonio]

61. Paranoia over 2008 and a natural instinct to attack

It was very stupid though, if she had run a positive campaign this would already be over.